Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
1. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first member hingedly coupled to the casing, the second member hingedly coupled to the casing as set forth in claims 4, 6 and 7; and a protrusion of the drive gear operable to engage a channel on an interior of the casing as set forth in claims 5, 7 and 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
It could be argued that the first and second members (216, 218) are pivotally coupled to the casing 202. However, it cannot be seen from the drawings that the first and second members are hindgedly coupled to the casing, since there is no hinge shown that connects the first and second members to the casing. See Fig. 2E of the drawings.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claims 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Schmode (7,503,119 B2). Regarding claim 18, Schmode teaches a cable support mechanism (1a, 1b, 2; Fig. 12) for removably coupling to a cable 5, the cable support mechanism comprising: a casing 2; a first pin (3a); a second pin (3b); a cable aperture (defined by the aperture formed by the clamping jaws 1a, 1b to receive the cable 5; Fig. 5); a first member (1a) hingeldy coupled to the casing 2 via the first pin (3a) and comprising a first shape (as a curved shaped to accommodate partially the cable 5; Fig. 5) that forms a first portion of the cable aperture; a second member (1b) hingedly coupled to the casing 2 via the second pin (3b) and comprising a second shape (as a curved shaped to accommodate partially the cable 5; Fig. 5) that forms a second portion of the cable aperture; a spring 18 configured to mediate movements of one or both of the first member (1a) and the second member (1b); wherein: when one or both of the first and second members are hingedly moved to configure the cable support mechanism (1a, 1b, 2) in a closed position, the cable aperture comprises a contracted shape (when the members 1a, 1b are biased towards each other) that holds the cable 5 within the cable aperture; when one or both of the first and second members are hingedly moved to configure the cable support mechanism is in an open position (when the members 1a, 1b are moves away from one another), the cable aperture comprises an expanded shape that allows the cable to enter and exit the cable aperture; and the spring 19 is configured to maintain the cable support mechanism in the closed position. See Figs. 1-12 in Schmode.
Regarding claim 19, Schmode teaches everything noted above including that the cable aperture is circular in shape. It should be noted that the cable aperture is circular shaped that accommodates a circular shaped cable 5. See Fig. 5 in Schmode.
Regarding claim 20, Schmode teaches everything noted above including that the first member (1a) is hingedly coupled to the casing 2 on a first side of a cable groove 18 of the casing 2; and the second member (2a) is hingedly coupled to the casing 2 on a second side of the cable groove 18 of the casing 2, the second side being opposite the first side. See Fig. 12 in Schmode.
Regarding claim 21, Schmode teaches everything noted above including that the cable support mechanism (1a, 1b, 2) is configured to latch onto (by clamping the cable 5; Fig. 5) the cable 5 in response to the cable being forced upward (as shown in Fig. 5, the cable 5 is forced upward towards the tip of the members 1a, 1b and the upper section of the aperture) into the cable aperture.
Regarding claim 22, Schmode teaches everything noted above including that the cable support mechanism (1a, 1b, 2) is configured to move from the closed position to the open position in response to a force being applied to one or both of the first member and the second member.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
5. Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmode in view of Sorkin (2021/0237142 A1). Regarding claim 23, Schmode teaches everything noted above including that a first end of the spring 19 is coupled to the first member (1a). Schmode does not explicitly teach that the second end of the spring is coupled to the second member. However, Sorkin teaches a first end of a spring 31 is coupled to the first member (53a) and a second end of the spring 31 is coupled to the second member (53b). See Fig. 6 in Sorkin. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary sill in the art to provide Schmode’s spring with a second end coupled to the second member, as taught by Sorkin, in order to enhance biasing force of the members towards each other.
6. Claims 4-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorkin in view of Schmode. Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, Sorkin teaches a cable support mechanism 70 (Fig. 6) for removably coupling a cable shearing system to a cable, the cable support mechanism 70 comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
7
3
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a cable aperture 92 (defined by the combination of grooves of both left and right clamp arms 53a, 53b; Figs. 6-7) sized to at least partially circumscribe the cable; a first member (53a) hingedly coupled to a casing (1, 32), the first member comprising: a first shape 88 that forms a first portion of the cable aperture; and a first sloped side (84, 86; see annotated Fig. 6 below) that is sloped (as can be seen in Fig. 6) towards the first shape 88 and is configured to guide the cable from a cable groove 103 of the casing (1, 32) into the cable aperture; a second member (53b) hingedly coupled to the casing, the second member comprising: a second shape 88 that forms a second portion of the cable aperture 92; and a second sloped side (84, 86; see annotated Fig. 6 below) side that is sloped towards the second shape 88 and is configured to guide the cable from the cable groove into the cable aperture; and a spring 31 operably coupled to one or both of the first member (53a) and the second member (53b) and configured to mediate movements of one or both of the first member and the second member; wherein: when the cable support mechanism is in a closed position, the cable aperture comprises a contracted shape that holds the cable within the cable aperture; when the cable support mechanism is in an open position, the cable aperture comprises an expanded shape that allows the cable to enter and exit the cable aperture; and the spring 31 is configured to maintain the cable support mechanism in the closed position (paragraphs [0039] and [0040]). See Figs. 1-7 in Sorkin.
Sorkin does not explicitly teach a second pin hingedly coupling the second member to the casing. In other words, Sorkin does not explicitly teach that the first and second members are separately hingedly coupled to the casing on both sides of the cable groove. However, Schmode teaches this feature. Specifically, Schmode discloses a cable tool in which a first member (1a) is hingedly coupled to a body (2) on a first side of a cable receiving region (18) via a pivot shaft (3a) and a second member (1b) is hingedly coupled to the body on a second, opposite side via a pivot shaft (3b). See Schmode, Figs. 1-7. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sorkin to include separate pivoting pins on opposite sides of the cable groove as taught by Schmode because Schmode demonstrates that locating the clamp members on separate parallel pivot axes supported by the tool body provides a stable and mechanically robust mounting arrangement that allows the members to move in a coordinated manner while accommodating insertion and retention of a cable of varying size. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying Schmode’s dual-pivot mounting arrangement to Sorkin’s clamp assembly would have yielded the predictable result of providing controlled opening and closing of the clamp members and reliable cable capture within strand channel 92, thereby improving the durability and operational reliability of the clamping mechanism.
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that cable aperture 92 is circular in shape (Fig. 7).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 20, Sorkin, as modified by Schmode, teaches everything noted above including that the first member is hingedly (as taught by Schmode) coupled to the casing (1, 32) on a first side of the cable groove of the casing; and the second member is hinged coupled (as taught by Schmode) to the casing on a second side of the cable groove.
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 21, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the cable support mechanism 70 is configured to latch onto the cable in response to the cable being forced upward through the cable groove and into the cable aperture 92.
Regarding claims 8, 15, and 22, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the cable support mechanism is configured to move from the closed position to the open position in response to a force being applied to one or both of the first sloped side of the first member and the second sloped side of the second member.
PNG
media_image2.png
8
5
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 9, 16, and 23, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including a first end of the spring 31 is coupled to the first member (53a) and a second end of the spring 31 is coupled to the second member (53b). See Fig. 6 in Sorkin.
Regarding claims 10 and 17, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the cable aperture 92 is aligned with the cable groove.
PNG
media_image3.png
959
846
media_image3.png
Greyscale
To the degree that it could be argued that the first and second sloped sides of Sorkin are not completely sloped towards their respective first and second shapes that formed the aperture, the rejection below is applied.
7. Claims 4-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorkin in view of Schmode and in further view of Thorson et al. (8,266,991 B2), hereinafter Thorson. Regarding claims 4 and 11, Sorkin teaches a cable support mechanism 70 (Fig. 6) for removably coupling a cable shearing system to a cable, the cable support mechanism 70 comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
7
3
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a cable aperture 92 (defined by the combination of grooves of both left and right clamp arms 53a, 53b; Figs. 6-7) sized to at least partially circumscribe the cable; a first member (53a) hingedly coupled to a casing (1, 32), the first member comprising: a first shape 88 that forms a first portion of the cable aperture; and a first sloped side (84, 86; see annotated Fig. 6 below) that is sloped (as can be seen in Fig. 6) towards the first shape 88 and is configured to guide the cable from a cable groove 103 of the casing (1, 32) into the cable aperture; a second member (53b) hingedly coupled to the casing, the second member comprising: a second shape 88 that forms a second portion of the cable aperture 92; and a second sloped side (84, 86; see annotated Fig. 6 above) side that is sloped towards the second shape 88 and is configured to guide the cable from the cable groove into the cable aperture; and a spring 31 operably coupled to one or both of the first member (53a) and the second member (53b) and configured to mediate movements of one or both of the first member and the second member; wherein: when the cable support mechanism is in a closed position, the cable aperture comprises a contracted shape that holds the cable within the cable aperture; when the cable support mechanism is in an open position, the cable aperture comprises an expanded shape that allows the cable to enter and exit the cable aperture; and the spring 31 is configured to maintain the cable support mechanism in the closed position (paragraphs [0039] and [0040]). See Figs. 1-7 in Sorkin.
Sorkin does not explicitly teach a second pin hingedly coupling the second member to the casing. In other words, Sorkin does not explicitly teach that the first and second members are separately hingedly coupled to the casing on both sides of the cable groove. However, Schmode teaches this feature. Specifically, Schmode discloses a cable tool in which a first member (1a) is hingedly coupled to a body (2) on a first side of a cable receiving region (18) via a pivot shaft (3a) and a second member (1b) is hingedly coupled to the body on a second, opposite side via a pivot shaft (3b). See Schmode, Figs. 1-7. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sorkin to include separate pivoting pins on opposite sides of the cable groove as taught by Schmode because Schmode demonstrates that locating the clamp members on separate parallel pivot axes supported by the tool body provides a stable and mechanically robust mounting arrangement that allows the members to move in a coordinated manner while accommodating insertion and retention of a cable of varying size. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying Schmode’s dual-pivot mounting arrangement to Sorkin’s clamp assembly would have yielded the predictable result of providing controlled opening and closing of the clamp members and reliable cable capture within strand channel 92, thereby improving the durability and operational reliability of the clamping mechanism.
It could be argued that the first and second sloped sides of Sorkin are not completely sloped toward their respective first and second shapes that form the aperture. However, Thorson teaches a cable support mechanism including a first member 175 having a sloped side 305 that extends toward a first shape forming part of aperture 185 and a second member 180 having a sloped side 320 that extends toward a second shape forming another part of aperture 185. See, e.g., Thorson, Fig. 7A. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the sloped sides of Sorkin’s cable support mechanism, as modified by Schmode, to have the fully inclined guide surfaces taught by Thorson in order to enhance guidance of the cable toward and into the cable aperture during lateral insertion. Thorson teaches that such surfaces guide a cable into the receiving aperture during lateral insertion. Sorkin likewise receives a cable laterally through throat 103 and into strand channel 92, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that employing Thorson’s guide surface configuration in Sorkin would facilitate cable entry and guidance into the cable aperture and thereby improve loading of the cable into the clamping region. The proposed modification merely applies a known cable-guiding configuration to a similar cable receiving mechanism to achieve the predictable result of improved cable guidance and does not alter the principle of operation of Sorkin’s device.
Regarding claims 5, and 19, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that cable aperture 92 is circular in shape (Fig. 7).
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the first member is hingedly (via sleeves 78 and pivoting rod 74; Fig. 6) coupled to the casing (1, 32) on a first side (as being located on one side of the cable groove) of the cable groove of the casing; and the second member is hinged coupled to the casing on a second side (as being located on the other side of the cable groove) of the cable groove.
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the cable support mechanism 70 is configured to latch onto the cable in response to the cable being forced upward through the cable groove and into the cable aperture 92.
Regarding claims 8 and 15, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the cable support mechanism is configured to move from the closed position to the open position in response to a force being applied to one or both of the first sloped side of the first member and the second sloped side of the second member.
PNG
media_image2.png
8
5
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including a first end of the spring 31 is coupled to the first member (53a) and a second end of the spring 31 is coupled to the second member (53b). See Fig. 6 in Sorkin.
Regarding claims 10 and 17, Sorkin teaches everything noted above including that the cable aperture 92 is aligned with the cable groove.
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant’s argument that specification discloses that the first and second members (216, 218) are hingedly coupled to the casing is misplaced. The drawing is objected because the hindged structure or mechanism for hindgley coupling ping the first and second members to the casing is not shown. The drawing merely shoes first and second pins. However, as stated above, it could be argued that the first and second members (216, 218) are pivotally coupled to the casing 202. However, it cannot be seen from the drawings that the first and second members are hindgedly coupled to the casing, since there is no hinge shown that connects the first and second members to the casing. See Fig. 2E of the drawings. A hinged structure is different than a simple pivot pin. The hinged structure as shown in Schmode includes two separate components that are overlapped and a pin that passes through the holes within the two separate components. This is a simple hindged structure that is not shown in the drawings.
See the definition of a hinge according to a dictionary below.
HINGE Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
1
a
: a jointed or flexible device on which a door, lid, or other swinging part turns
b
: a flexible ligamentous joint
c
: a small piece of thin gummed paper used in fastening a postage stamp in an album
2
: a determining factor : TURNING POINT
[AltContent: rect]
Illustration of hinge
PNG
media_image4.png
234
275
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s argument that the Examiner’s rationale is merely conclusory and based on impermissible hindsight is not persuasive.
With respect to the combination of Sorkin and Schmode, the rejection is not based on a general assertion that the structures are equivalent. Rather, Schmode expressly teaches first and second jaw members mounted on separate parallel pivot shafts on opposite sides of a cable receiving region. Schmode further teaches that such an arrangement permits coordinated opening and closing movement of the jaws while accommodating cables of varying sizes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that incorporating Schmode’s dual-pivot arrangement into Sorkin would provide the predictable benefit of stable and controlled movement of the clamp members and reliable cable retention. The Examiner’s rationale is therefore based on the teachings of the references themselves and the predictable results of the modification, not on Applicant’s disclosure.
Applicant’s argument regarding the combination of Sorkin and Thorson is likewise unpersuasive. The rejection is not based merely on the proposition that changes in shape are within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Rather, Thorson teaches inclined guide surfaces that facilitate lateral insertion and guidance of a cable into a receiving opening. Because Sorkin is likewise directed to laterally receiving a cable into a cable channel, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ Thorson’s guide surface configuration in Sorkin to improve cable guidance into the channel and facilitate cable insertion. The proposed modification represents the application of a known cable-guiding technique to a similar device to achieve a predictable result and therefore does not rely on impermissible hindsight.
Applicant’s argument that the Examiner has not provided an adequate explanation as to why one of ordinary skill in the art would combine the references and how the references can be combined is not persuasive.
With respect to the combination of Sorkin and Schmode, the Examiner has provided an adequate rationale for the proposed modification. Schmode teaches first and second jaw members mounted on separate parallel pivot shafts on opposite sides of a cable-receiving region. Schmode further teaches that this arrangement provides coordinated opening and closing movement of the jaws while accommodating cables of varying sizes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that incorporating Schmode’s dual-pivot arrangement into Sorkin’s clamp assembly would provide the predictable benefit of stable and controlled movement of the clamp members and reliable cable retention. The proposed modification merely substitutes one known jaw mounting arrangement for another known jaw mounting arrangement performing the same purpose and would not alter the principle of operation of Sorkin’s device. Therefore, the Examiner’s rationale is based on the teachings of the references and the predictable results of the modification, rather than on Applicant’s disclosure.
With respect to the combination of Sorkin and Thorson, the Examiner has likewise provided an adequate rationale for the proposed modification. Thorson teaches inclined guide surfaces that facilitate guiding a cable into a receiving opening. Because Sorkin is similarly directed to laterally receiving a cable into a strand channel through a clamp entry, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ Thorson’s guide surface configuration in Sorkin to facilitate cable insertion and guidance into the strand channel. The proposed modification merely substitutes one known cable-guiding geometry for another and does not alter the principle of operation of Sorkin’s clamp assembly. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected the combination to function successfully and achieve the predictable result of improved cable guidance. The rejection is therefore based on the teachings of the references themselves and not on impermissible hindsight reconstruction.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Perrino (4,108,028) teaches a cable support mechanism.
10. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Boyer Ashley can be reached on (571) 272-4502. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
June 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights